Tackling the real effects of climate change requires more practical aid and less political point-scoring
When discussion turns to climate change, it is too often polluted by politics. This holds true whether the conversation is between friends in a coffee shop, pundits in the media or leaders at a global forum. The result is that, too often there is little practical debate about what can be done to tackle the effects of our changing climate. Instead, there is an argument about whether it is caused, or exacerbated, by human activity, and which governments or corporations are the "villains" of the piece who should be penalised.
Of course, there must be more and better research into exactly what is happening and why, and whether it can be prevented or reversed. But what is critically important is to implement commonsense solutions to the already known effects of climate change. If some low-lying islands face being submerged, can we prevent that, or should we make contingency plans to evacuate their populations? If polar bears risk extinction because their habitat is disappearing, how can the species be saved? If parts of the world get hotter, or colder, or drier, or wetter, how do we adapt?
Talkfests such as the UN Climate Summit in New York this week are important, but only if they lead to concrete and coordinated action rather than just release more hot air.